The Sun. — London, England, 1838-04-26 00:00:00

CHURCH EXTENSION. (From our Second Edition of last night.) (The following, we are bound to state, is an imperfect re v ort of Dr. Chalmers' long and interesting lecture. We card the Rev. Gentleman very indistinctly; he read his ire with great rapidity ; and the pe cu li ar i t i es o f h i s pronun ci !talon are very great. We state this in our justification, be it awe it seems probable that the Rev. Gentleman will give is 'manuscript to the Press. 'This was the day appointed for Dr. Chalmers to deliver the kst of a series of lectures on the above subject. By half-past cne o'clock the great room in Hanover-square was nearly When the Rev. Doctor entered, the room was crowded by a most respectable audience, amongst whom was the Duke of Cambridge, Sir R. H. Inglis, Sir J. Graham, Lord Teign mouth, Lord Bexley, and several Bishops. A prayer having been offered up by the Rev. Mr. Wilke, Dr. dueemsas Paid the subject of the first lecture was a :statement of the question respecting a National Establishment ad Christianity, and the exposure of the misconceptions re :erecting it, There was a misconception on the part of cer tain religtnists, with respect to the necessity of an Establish ment, a'ed that because it appeared to them as a mere piece of mP.chinery. It appeared to them as only a machine, <lifff_rent in its effects, according as it was worked on from al%ove—they considered that it was unnecessary to have human • -aid, human agency in the extension of the truths of religion, because that He who ruled all had all in his own power. Such was the homage of a strong, but mistaken piety. In the fervency of their dependence on Him they would do nothing themselves,—but more especially with regard to His Church, they thought that human strength and human activity were alike uncalled for. To meet such opi nions it would be enough to shew that if acted upon or carried into effect., it would be at variance with all the analogies of nature atid prudence. In agriculture, in seamanship, and in all other human affairs—were they to do nothing them selves, but leave all to nature? There would then scarcely be f'Jund food enough for the beasts of the field, and probe- TV °, a few savages—were they to do nothing but to depend upon tae Ruler of all for the shower which gave the produce—were they not to assist nature, or the Ruler of nature—were they to cease to labour, there would be no produce. It was with the potent working of man and unscrut -able working of nature, or of the Ruler of the Universe, who was nature's God—it was these all working harmoniously together that the produce was found to be good for the food of man. That law held true also in the work of religious instruction. They were no doubt to put their entire dependence upon the ruling power of G 4d, who giveth the increase ; but that was not to supersede their own efforts in the good work. Every Minister was bound, notwithstanding his faith, to work diligently in his allotted part of the vineyard ; and all who felt the importance of religion were equally bound to use every endeavour in their power towards the spread of the eternal Gospel. There was a region in South America where the soil was of 7 the best possible nature—it was capable of yielding the best of the earth—but from the want of rain, no human labour which could be put upon it would make it profitable to the party. There was the presence of all that was essential for the production of every thing that was wanted, but the negation of the blessed shower from heaven—if some physical change were to come over that land— if rain were to fall in that country as it does in others—then and then only could there be a motive for the ap plication of human activity and skill. Even so was it in the work of spiritual cultivation ; for the prosperity of that work, there must be a descent of the living waters from the God above ; but upon that account they were not to cease their labour ; on the contrary it ought etet'aer to stimulate them to further exertions. The part which God took in the operation did not abrogate the part which man ought to take. It was not enough that e'irere was a descent—there must be a distribution also, an order that the inestimable blessings of Divine knowledge 'might be conveyed to all houses and families. While they acknowledged a celestial descent of grace from above, they must not neglect the terrestial distribution. That there was co-operation between these was evident from the single expression of men being fellow-workers with God. The principle rested not on single or incidental testimony. It pervaded the whole system of divine administration. A machinery was not the less essential on earth because the spirit which guided and animated its movements was from :heaven. There was nothing in that to disparage or , do away with the paramount necessity of a spiritual influence whatever the apprehension might be of a mistaken—. he would even say, of a drivelling though a sincere piety—which greatly under-rated the importance of a visible economy in things ecclesiastical, and which set it aside as a mere system of earthly experience. Such an ecoe unmy might, nevertheless, in the order of cause and effect, be an essential stepping-stone to the attain ment of the grand object. The husbandman after fiaving tilled his field looked for rain, without which the cuitured territory would be a dry waste. The Christian Governor after having laid down his parishes and planted his churches thereon, looked for a descent of the blesshegs from above, without which the country would be a Tni? l,-- A wilderness. It should be remembered that when the 2 1r.rit did enlighten or impress a human soul it was generally totrough the meJium of the weed of God—the Bible formed it material pathway for its communication. This doctrine on- Anuiced the importance of multiplying the Scriptures. The , soundness of this argument became more obvious, when it was recollected, that at the commencement, and throughout the successive ages of Christianity, although the Spirit had been the great agent in conversions, yet it made choice of its own vehicles. By means of one proceeding, the whole system of Chris tianity could have been carried to the heart of man. But instead of that, two were adopted—one supernatural, the other human. Peter was warned to go to Cornelius, and Cornelius was warned that Peter would come to him. The Gospel was not preached by beings of a higher order to a lower, but by men to men. It was a message borne to the ears of men by human tongues. In other words it was by the truth distributed by human means, and expounded by human discourse. It was for us to see that the instrumentality was going on—that the Bible was; in every house—for the furtherance and distri bution of Christianity upon earth ; which nevertheless, with zut interference from above, could not have existence. It was for us t o strike nut the channels of conveyance—but for God to fill them. It was for us to do the work of the husbandman, to prepare the soil, and to lieu,; in the seed which heaven supplied—but it was for God alone to give it fruit, in ways inscrutable to human intellect. There was nothing in the doctrine of the Spirit to reduce, but very much to enhance the importance of the present question. How was the gospel best to be disseminated by human means—how were we to secure its being preached to the people? But with all our care the preaching of tha Gospel fell far short of more than one half of the people. How then were we to secure that the Gospel should be brought home to every door ? That of itself formed a strong ground of preference of an Esta blished Church to the voluntary system. On that gr,und it was the object of himself and his coadjutors to show that the certain dissemination of the Gospel could only be effected by a national Church, and that it caa never he done by the voluntary system, or by what was called the free-trade in Christianity.—( Hear, hear, hear. ) They s',ould assume as to the basis of their definition of a Church Establi diment, that it was " a sure and settled means of providing for the administration of Christianity." His sin gle attempt at that moment, was not the settlement of his belief, but the fixing of his language.—( Hear, hear.) lie should not, at present, contend whether a Church Establishment was a good thing or not ; but what should he understood by the term Establishment? Where 'ever there was a legal provision for the preaching of the Gospel, there was an Established Church. The ides of an Establishment might or might not ime ply what wee commonly understood by the connexion be tween the Church and State. If, indeed, the Church was directly maintained by the State, either by a fixed endow ment, or by an annual grant, then there was undoubtedly such a connexion. But on the other hand it might be a national Church, if the fixed means of its support were derived from private endowments. It was not less an Establishment on that account, it was enough that there should be a fund to support it. If the Church was indorsed to the rich, it could not be said that it belonged to the State ; all that the State had to do Was to make good the original foundation ; it was upon this ground that the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge were national Esta blishments.—(Cheers.) It was not on account of their an tiquity that they were Establishments ; it was not on account of the origin of their property, but its application; although the Church should be wholly supported by the State in things temporal. there was no connexion between them, for it followed not that the connexion should proceed any further. There might be an entire dependance on the state of things temporal, with. out there being any dependance on things ecclesiastical. The Church received from the State the maintenance of its Clergy, and the Clergy in return gave education, the Church reserving to itself what that education should be. The State might support that Ecclesiastical Establishment, still leaving the Church to provide for its own orders and regulations. By a system of endowed schools, education was spread among districts which but for such a system would be left in ignorance. An endowment did not detract from education, but added to it. The Church might so far submit itself to the State as to receive maintenance from it, but notwithstanding that it might have no connection with it ; in an ecclesiastical point of view.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It was only by the establishment of Church and State that the waters of life would flow in the proper Channel. The whole effect of this was to bring the Gospel to thousands of immortal creatures that otherwise would not have the benefit of it. The State, it was true, kept the Church, but the Church in return for that paid the State tenfold.— (Cheers.) The best preservation of nations was universal Christian education, and that was to be accomplished by the en dowment of national establishments. The State paid the Church but the Church might maintain the integrity of her worship. She w as the sane hallowed Church as when the fires of martyrdom were raised.—(Cheering.) An Establish ment, and an Establishment alone, was the only power by which religion could be perpetuated. In the time of Constantine there were great corruptions in the Church, but that was not attributable to an Esta blishment, for the cause of the corruption being in the ascendancy of superstition, which had vested the ecclesiastics with powers which they applied to the ag grandisement of things temporal. —( Hear, and loud cheers.) Thp u __enormous wealth of the ecclesiastics was the fruit of " urari ~fisilt and the effect of an Establishment re . 44 . -:- . es. Such was the state of the Church of / s t . e ,, - , *-4 .0 _wXuld ask whether that Church or 'lrn/Otrits C i fillKiilen,uro ‘ ll y ' l rVend impeached the doctrines of the i . :l:irte- 4 4 . . -I; . lort i linite that the Reformers, not those of .. . 4 • . .A 3 SiOnt.;:ilef4ig ughtar)—knew how to make dis ---::::: 4:- /r. .../ ''' tv- --7 - 1 - '"•:" */- NI al a s tinctions between the machinery and the men.—(Cheers.) The Reformers had substituted the pure gospel of Christ for the doctrines of the Church of Rome. The lessons might be good or they might be bad. Say they were bad, and then the question was whether they should change ! the lessons, or put down and d em olish the machinery. H e wou ld , ask, in the name of common sense, where lay the wisdom of destroying the machinery ? It was to be kept up forsooth so long as it served the purposes of corruption and error, but when it turned from evil, it was to be put down. Was this the treatment, he would ask, which they were to receive at the hands of the country--a Government calling itself a popular Government ? After having furnished the:facilities for a ra 6, bid circulation through the famili es o f th e land ; then when the evil was to bo made good—was that the time that the facilities for doing so should be taken away ? So long as the religion it disseminated was a moral poison, destroying the hearts and the habits of the people, it had the prerogatives of an Establishment ; but now the aqueducts by which the water ' cif life was to be spread abroad among the nati ons were to be destroyed. What a contrast might here be drawn between the Ecclesiastical Reformers of the past and present day.l It was in the high walks of theolo and sentiment that the former were met with. The aim was not to destroy the Established Church but to render it more firm. ( Hear. )" The objed of some reformers of the present day was to alter what might be called the external part of the Church with what might bi termed the economics of the Church—its riches—its re; venues—the number and pay of its officers, and so on. Such might prove a useful—even a salutary undertak ing. The object of another class of Reformers w to mend the Churches' frame-work, the obvious effe of which would be to mutilate and weaken, an ultimately to destroy. In former times it was a war principle among the Reformers ; and many Divines an Nobles of England were enlisted on the side of Scrip ture, and of a pure structure of instruction throughout the parishes of the kingdom. Altogether it was a nobler con test than that which now called forth the championship both of Priests and Parliament men. The contest then related to the quality of the instruction that should be given to the people, and the result was, that it should be the pure water of life, taken at once from the fountain head of inspiration. The struggle now related not to the quality of spiritual nourishment, but rather to the kind of apparatus, which should be maintained for the distri bution of it. It was a question, not of theology, or morals, but of machinery, and many of the economical and arithmetical Reformers of the present age felt themselves abundautly qualified for the task. He could not but remark on the character of the two Re formations. If the ono was moral, the other might be termed mechanical. It was not to amend, but to demo lish altogether the framework of the Establishment. The Reformers of the present day might be compared to the machine-breakers of Kent, the frame.breakere of Worcester, or the incendiaries of the Southern and Midland counties. It was by the strength of principle that our venerable forefathers three centuries ago effected the Reformation. In this age we gladly look back with affectionate remembrance to the more excellent ways of our forefathers. Knox the grea Reformer did not destroyed the machinery of the Popi Church—he took possession of it.—(Great laughter. He took possession of the good machinery, but dismisse the bad workmen, and put the machine into other hands: Fury was often blind, and when the accumulated wrong of many ages had aroused an indignant community, they migh be expected to abolish the establishments that had lon gloated over them. Between the cupidity of the nobleme and the rage of the people themselves, the Establishmen might have been swept off the face of the earth ; but their gre Reformer made a stand for the Church and the Clergy , and took the machinery as entire and uninjured he could for the benefit of future generation The truth was, that Knox could not have made the way he di with his purer doctrines, unless he had gained possession the path. ways, so far as he had preserved them, his doctrine spreaal like lightning over the land. But for that, he migh have found the country at large an impassable forest, but in the midst of the stormy agitation of that period the view of the great Reformer had been calm, and regulated, and phi losophical. The corruption of the era having spread abroa throughout the Establishment was no more an argument for the destruction of the Establishment than the licentiousness of the Press was an argument for the destruction of print ing presses. The way to extend and preserve both was— making the one an instrument for the distribution of ' religious instruction, and the other an instrument for the diffusion of moral works throughout the land. The Reform which was desirable for the Church, whether of England or Scotland, was not to destroy the machine but to repair it.—( Cheers.) The Reform which was wanted was to leave the machine, and to infuse a new spirit into it, so that it might work better. The thing wanted was an internal Reform—they did not require a change in the theo logy of either Church—that there might be some beneficial though slight change made in the books of both. —( Cheers.) It was not enough to have good machinery, they must have good men for the working of it.—Cheers.) The Reformers of other days kept up the machinery—they respected it—and only put it into better hands when the change took place from the darkness and errors of Popery to the tight of the Reformation.—(Cheers.) The Reformers of the present day, with a personal enmity to the clergy, were doing all in their power to wrest from their hands the most effectual engine they possessed for the dif fusion for the blessing, of religion. The former Reforma tion was good—the martyrs whose blood was shed, died not fighting for the destruction of the Church, but for its main tenance and for the liberty of preaching the pure Gospel. The reformers of the present day were impetuous, bustling agitators, in whose breasts politics had taken the place of reli gion—(Hear, hear, hear, and cheers)—anu who wished fur the overthrow of those altars which in former days were upheld in splendour by our worthy forefathers. lie would read an extract from a writer of great power and great prejudice, treating of the Established Church of Eng land, of which he (the writer in question) greatly admired the principles although he disapproved its work ing, William Cobbett. On the latter point, he ( Dr. Chal mers) did not sympathise with him.—( Hear.) An Esta blished Church, said Mr. Cobbett, has for its object to provide for the people the means of assembling to worship—to provide a. place of burial—to provide a priest to go to each house—to counsel the wayward—to console the unhappy—to teach the children their duty to their parents, their God, and their country —to perform the reli gious ceremonies of marriage and baptism—and, above all, to instruct the people irs the Christian religion. All those things (continued Mr. Cobbet) are to be provided for by the owners of the houses and lands, and are to be the property of the poorest man in the state.—( Hear, hear.) Now there could not be a better definition of an Established Church.—( Hear, hear. )—The same writer went on to speak of the workirg of the Church of England in terms with which he ( Dr. C.) did not agree. He said—" This the parsons teli us, the people hare. But they know that it is2not the case. They know that the parsons do not visit teem whet: they are sick. They know that the parsons do not teach their children; end that although the churchwardens have to certify to the Bishops that the children communicate, the people know that such is not the case. They know that the parsons sit upon the bench with the magistrates. They know that they punish the poor without cause.--( Laughter.) They know that they send a poor man to prison for what is called poaching ; (Great laughter)—and it would be as difficult to get the people to raise a hand in defence of the Church as to make a Jew give up a farthing of his interest."— ( Laughter.) The next extract went on to state the opinion of the writer, that all should pay to the Established Church: "In this case (said Mr. Cobbett), we should be governed by experience, and here we shall find experience the best guide, as in all things else. It is not because an institution has ben ii , u,ed it should be done away with. Even kings may be driven from their thrones—( Laughter)—but it does not fellow that Monarchy should be abolished.—( Hear, hear.) If the establishment be necesssary, the Dissenter should be require& to contribute to its maintenance. An establishment could not consist of all creeds, but at the same time a Church is not national unless all be taxed for its support— ( Hear, hear)—and it is neither unjust nor impolitic to make all contribute, hat there may be a Church in each parish, a priest to teach religion, and a place for the burial of the dead. I was (continued Mr. Cobbett) a sincere Church man, for I knew that those who did all the la bour and had neither houses nor lands, hould have a church to worship in—a priest to teach them, and a place for burial, at the expense of those who possessed all the houses and the lands. In the Church and its possessions, I saw the patrimony of the people.—( Repeated applause.) For this reason I was a friend to the Established Church, and a power ful friend of the Church I was able to be, thank God.— (Great laughter.) Go up on any hill in Suffolk, and yon will see a steeple, and close by it a decent house, where e r t eoeft the the p w ar e i a sh k . a v n an d ts his a m re ed a i l a l tio n n ati vp you will find a ma n at l east of some education. His ser agaHinest benevolent,isthe powerful. He has the greatest interest of any man in the parish in the happiness and welfare of all who live in it. When you ima gine his office, hi s i n fl uence, and the good he does, you would say that hurricane or earthquake must destroy this ' land before the people ;will content to pull down those steeples."—(Great applause.) In conclusion, he would say that their distinct object was to demonstrate the power and excellence that belonged to the national Establishment of religion ; and, with regard to the working of it,' he might state, that notwithstanding all that had been said, evidence had been given of its importaaco to the well being of the ceimmunity. If it was true that there was an improvement ii!d the Church of Scotland it ought to be a source at rejoicing that it had passed into abler hands. In Ireland .persecution had given place to true religion, and such being the case, was •the present the time to put a stop to it,? He trusted that by th e bl ess i ng of Heaven they should be enabled not only to preserve the esta blishment, but to rivet the three Churches together more firmly; and in that great work he trusted they would have the assist aim) of the wise and good of their day. (The Rev. Gentleman concluded amid loud cheering. ) The Rev. Gentleman stated that the object of his next lecture on Friday would be the vindication of a national reli gious Establishment, in opposition to the reasoning and views of the economists. ASSURANCE COMPANIES,&c. &c. &c. .20,c00 1,500,60 ed. 6/. p. et. Bank of Scotland .. 831.65, Bd, eh. all pi 1921. 2,000,04)01. 4 p. ct Royal or Scotland eiom ......... . ... 1 00/. sh. all pd :ICO/. 3,000 500 :000 000k 61 8 . pp.. ct, c ß o r m iti m sh er L ci i a n l C ...piny ...................... Pd 180 d. -23 180 0 1 1 : 5,000,0001. 5 o. ct. National . 1001 eh • • 104 pd 16f1. 2501. eh, 501. pd 714 Scotland 4 4 0020004 4 p. et Western of 2OOl, sh SOI. Pd 421. INSURANCE COMPANIES, 250,0001 h. 61p. ct. Scottish Union ... ............... 204 ch. 1/, pd 265. 7,502 61 p. ct. Hercules Co.of du....n.. .................... a .... i ......... 50 . 0,3 .... 11 .... s . s . hh . : lo/. pd 711 a I°°l . eh ' li Mt Pd 191 151. 1 5 % :00 00 0 0 pp: ct. North l i n c s i qr:n u c r e it C i.h .... t . 0 .. t . 1 , a .. n . ... ............. °all pd 161. 1 2/ 4 5s 2,000,0001. 61. p. ct. Glasgow Union 1,000 5 p. ct. Caledonian Fire lOOl. sh. 101. pd 191 01 5,000 6 p. et. Edinbu i rgh o Li a re ............. lOO4 sh. 10/. pd HI led MISCELLANEOUS. all il pd 651. d 2g i l . . 100,000 si p. at. We wn st . o aAni 5,400 5 per cent. Edinb. Joint Steck A ater 4a. ah. all pd WI. d l lGl t t a l ed. s n . 4,810 ......... Carron Iron Company .. 250/ Ed Dit i .sh. all pd 44/. 2 00Osh 15 per cent. Shotts Iron Founciery... .501. sh 381. pd 45/, 10,000 3 per cent. Edinburgh & Leith. Glass 2O/. s h . 1,3 1. • pci 5/. 4.500 10 per cant. Edinburgh Coal Gas. .......... 251. sh. all pd 661. 4,450 10 per cent. Glasgow Gas 251. sh. all pd 13e1, 750 71 per cent. Leith Coal Gas 20/. sh. all pd 45/. 1,206 Edinburgh and Dalkeith Rai ' way... 504 sh 351. 3,000 5 per cent. Equitable Loan Company 451.8 h. W. pd 101. _IIIPWRECK.—On Saturday night the schooner Ray, George Germain, master and sole owner, from Dublin to Gloucester, laden with porter, furniture, bones, and oat meal, was totally wrecked at Peurhosveilw, about two miles to the southward of the South Stack lighthouse. The captain, three seamen and a female passenger, perished. The mate, whose name is William Smith, and a boy named Thomas Mil. l(r, were saved. The body of the female was found early on Sunday morning, but none of the others have been found yet. Of the cargo a few casks of porter only have been preserved. PRICES Ot UANALS, DOCK STOCKS, LONDON, TUESDAY, APRIL 24. Number Dividend Price of per CANALS. per Shares. Annum. Paid. Share 1,766 7 pet cent. Ashton and Oldham....Average 971.18+. sh. 135 1.082 41. AshLy-de-le-Zouch Average 115... sh. 65 1,260 Basingstoke 1004 sh. 5 1,005 51. Brecknock and Abergavenny 150 i sh. 100 8,000 I-16sh, 9/ 6s. Birmingham, 1-16th share 81. & 711. 220 i 000 Ditto and Liverpool Junct...1304 sh. 100 pd . £44 tlOO 3/. Bridgewater and Taunton -.1001. sh. all pd 64 400 4/. Chelmer and Black water 100/ sh. 102 500 461. C)ventry. 1001 sh. 745 4.545 Croydon ...-- ........ Average 311. 25.10 d. sh. 3 , 2,060/ 41. Os. Dudley ... 600 4 14i. Derby 1001 sh. 133 2 0 ,000 4 per cent, sanuoe and Mayne 4ll. 13s. 4d.pd 3314 3,5754 3!. Ellesmere and Chester Average 1331. sk. 77 231 461. Erawash 1001 sn. 700 ,1,297 281. Forth and Clyde Average 4001.165. eh. 560 -1,600 12/. Grand Junction 1001 sh. 207 2,494 14 Grand Union 1001. sh 95 1,500 Grand Surrey .. _..... 1001.21 20 2 0,000,. 41. percent . Ditto (optional) 1 .. 0an lOOl. 70 4,896 Grand Western 600 131.12 x. Bd. Glamorganshire, Average cost 1721. 132.4 d. 749 10s. Grantham 150/. sh. 6,2*1 21. Os. Huddersfield Average 571. fis. 6d. sh. 100 Kensington 100 sh. all pd. 2 5,328 11. ss. Kennet and Avon, Average 391. Mi. 10d. sh. 2,8974 241. Leeds and Liverpool 1001. sh. 5451 131. Leicester l4O/• sh. 1,897 6/. Os. Leicester and Northampton... Aver 63/. 10s. 2.400 JO/. Monmouthshire 100/.sh. ' 150 104 Melton Mowbray 100/, eh. 500 251. Mersey and Irwell 1001. sh. 3,000 U. 10s. Macclesfield 1001. sh. all pd. ' 247 17/. Neath 100/.sh. ' 1,786 301. Oxford . 1001. sh. 2,400 51. Peak Forest Aver..ge about 78/. sh. 1,418 12s. Regent's (or London) Aver. 33/. I6s. Bd. sh. 5,609 61. per cent. Rochdale 500 sr. Shropshire 1251. eh. 600 91. 10s. Somerset Coal 1501. sh. 3,6001. 44 percent. Ditto Lock Fund Stock l2l. Ws. sh. 700 404 Staffbrd and Worcester l4Ol. sh. 500 94 Shrewsbury 1251. eh. 300 9/. stourbridge 3,647 21. Os. Stratford-on-Avon ...Average 791.95. tsd. sh. 533 15/. Swansea 1001 sh 3,762 11. 15s. Severn and Wye and Railway...Av 331. sh. !,60045n. 32/. 10s. Trent and Mersey, 4 share 100/. sh. 8.149 ... ...... Thames ;:nd Medway... Aver. 191 . 5 5. B d. sh. 65 3 h., , 1, .h. 3 1 " 4. Warwick a'id Birmingham 1001. oh. 9, Ili. Warwick and Napton lOO/. sh. 6,000 41.05. Worcester and Birmingham... Av. 784 81. sh. 5,000 25e. Wilts an.i. Berks .. Average 671. 10s. 88. sh. 800 31. Wyrley and Essington 1251. sh , z.n Wisbeach lO5l. sh. 1.103 Is. Wey and Arun llOl. sh. DOCKS. 1: 6 06 ° 5 7 81 , 3p. a Commercial ... .07)01.5h. 198,667 I. 6 per ct. East India Stock 7,238,3 04/. 514. p.ct. London Stock Ditto Bonds 1,380,0001. W. p. ct. West India Stock 2,209 il . 19s. Bristol 68,32.0. 51. per cent. Ditto Notes, various amounts 1,352,732 5 percent. St. Katharine Stock 500,000 44 per oent. Ditto Bonds ~ 200.000 4 per cent. Ditto Bonds for 10 years 2.500 . .... Deptford Pier 201. sh. 201. pd BRIDGES. 1,600 lOs. Hammersmai, 5Ol. sh. 7,231 Southwark, Old Av. 63/. 2s. Bd. sh. 1,704) 11. 15s. Ditto, Now, of 74 per cent. 5Ol. sh. 5,000 Waterloo 5,000 183. Bd. Ditto, Old Annuities of 81. 6Ol. pd 5,000 I6s. 4d. Ditto, New Ditto of 71 40/. pd 5, 0,0001. 51. per cent. Ditto Bonds 5,818 17s Vauxhall Average 701. 10s. 13d. sh. ASSURANCE , COMPAN:ES. 1001 E 0 113 100 100 1001 2,000 311os Albion 5001. sh. 501 pd tlO 30,000 r fn e :i Tel Alliance,British & Foreign 1001. eh. 1011. pd 131 50,000 6 per cent. Ditto, Marine 1001. sh. 51. pd 61 24,000 V per ah. Atlas 1,200 Ish. 5/. Birmingham N ire 2501. sh. 551. pd 1071 20,000 41 per cent. British Fire 2501. sh. 501. pd 40 12. 1 000 61. per cent. British Commercial 50/. *h. 5/, pd 6 5,000 51. percent. Clerical, Meili..al,&c. Life, ICol.sh. 2110 s pd 4 4,000 21 des County 1001. sh. 101, pd 42 20,000 ss. Eagle 50/. eh. 51. pd 51 200 [ser cent. and 301138.1 Economic " le lOOOl. ah. 2501. pd 275 2,271 225. percent. European Li,_ 2Ol. eh. all pd 22 30,000 2s. Ditto, New 2O/. eh. 21. pd 11 1,000,0001. 71. per ct. Globe Stock 1511 20,000 51' Guardian lOO/. sh. 271/ pd 341 10,000 6s. ed. Hope 2,400 51. 7s. 6d. Imperial Fire 5001. sh. 501. pd 127 7,500 9s. Imperial Life 1001. sh. 10!. pd 101 13,452 4/. per cent. Indemnity Marine 100/. sh. 8/. pd 22 2,020 31 lOs Kent Fire 501. sh. all pd 82 3!. Ditto Life 79 10,'00 les. Law Life 1001. sh. 10/. pd 251 SMO 10s. London, Fir , 251. sh. 121. 10s, rd 1, 3,900 10s. London, Ship 251. sh. 121. 10s. pd 16 1,000,0061. ... ..... Minerva Life 100/. oh. 30,0 , 0 M. per cent. Palladium Lit. 50/. *h. V. pd 218 s lid 50,001 U. per cent. Protector Fire 2O/. sh. 2!. pd I7e Od 2,500 1/. Provident Lne llBl/. sh. 10/. pd 20 100,000 ss. Rock Life 201. *h. 1/, pd 01 629,2201 5/. per cent. Royal Exchange Stock._ 225 6,000 5 percent. University Life lOOl. sh. Si. pd 51 50,000 4 per cent. United Kingdom Life 24 pd JOINT STOCK BANKS 25,000 i per cent. Agric. and Comm. of Ireland 251. sh. 10/. pd 14 5,000 Australasia 4Ol. sh. 401. pd 71 10,000 10 per cent. Bank of Birmingham 5Ol. eh. 101. pd 13 0,000 IA per cent. Birmingham Bank 5Ol. sh. 5/. pd 181 2,000 5 per cent. London and Westminster...loo/ sh. 201. pd sr ..',OOO 4 per cent. Lancaster......... ........ .. ........ 1001. oh. 204 pd 30 3,000 Liverpool 1001 sh. 10!. pd 23 50,000 71 per sent Manchester and Liverpool] 1001, sh. 151 pd 19 Discount 2 0 ,000 7 percent. Manchester lON. sh. 25/ pd 7 20,00 Provincial Bank of 1 reland 1001. eh. 25/. pi 4' 20, 00 National Bank of Ireland 5Ol. sh. 171/. pd I 10,000 5 per cent. National Provincial Eng. lOO/. *h. 351. pd 2 10,000 Gloucestershire 5Ol. *h. 101. pd 5 6,000 10 per cent- Hampshire... 5Ol. sh. 51. pd GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANIES. 2,500 11 5s 6el Bath 2O/. eh. 10!. pd 5,000 British 4Ol. sh. 161. pd 5,000 i 51 .e d e 1,.., c 5 e . 1 Ditto Provincial 204 *h. 19 d Ss. 9a:3 55 lOs Birmingham 5Ol. eh. 1,250 21 Os Bristol 2O:. *h. 1,500 3' los Brighton 2Ol. sh. 750 3110 a Ditto, New 2Ol. sh. 181. pd 2,171 41 per cent. Brighton tleneral 201. *h. all pd 4,000 . 4/. Continental Consolidated loot. 821/. pd 1,000 10/. City of London lOOl. sh. all pd 1, 0 00 6/. Ditto, New 11,000 41. 10s. Equitable 5Ol. pd 10, , 00 22 per cent. Imperial 800 5/. per cent. Isle of Thanet 251. sh. 201. pd 2,3.50 61, per cent. Independent 3Ol. sh. all pd 9,000 31. per cent. Phoenix 501. *4. 39/. pd 1,000 41. per cent. Ratcliff lOOl. sh. 80/. pd 1,01:0 South Metropolitan 8,200 51. per cent. United General 5O/. sh. 461. pd 210 5/. per cent. Warwick 501. sh. 400 51. per cent Wakefield 251. sh. 12,000 3/. Westminster Chartered 6,000 12s. Ditto Sew 5ll. sh. 10/. pd 800 Yarmouth 201 sh. 181. pd WATER WDRKS. 1,800 9e. Birmingham 251. sh. 25!. pd 1,134 61. East London lOO/ sh. 1 2 8 :v00 500 21 ,21 1 . 05 Gr-ind junction ....Average 411 1381.004d.1: :h h : 372 IN. Liverpool Bootle 2201. sh. 3 1;15% 11 5. I‘fr. 2! 1 1 Nos el h lt e l ; , , t e e r r l a ,o h i d id s o ay nß or r d idge Water A n ilo n ooo l ii i . i . t : i itl es ... i 0 1,000 4 per cent. S o uth London ~ , 2:54 4/. 1,360 1/ lls 1 1V o e r s k t B 3 i i i i itl i i i nT I CoTL 'A es y s e e r e ag r e ro 6 p 3 .... .................... :h i' : N IRON RAILWAYS. 6,300 Birmingham and Derby 9,5 , 00 7,500 15,•13) Birmingham and Gloucester .......... 151, pd lc 060 Bristol Bi rli n and n h i a i in,1.l Exeterri at 01, and Th.: m , . 0 i5 .. 8 ..1 .. h u . 7c i 1 u t . i Junction 15, 2:1. Calcutta and Saugur 50/, eh. 2/. pd f 7,500 Cheltenham and G. Western...lool. sh. 711 4 3,009 Clarence lOO/. sh. 100/. pd 40 12,000 8.000 ..... .... Dublin and Kilkenny 1001. sh. 11 pd 1 00,000 Eastern Counties 251. sh. 5/. pd 4 Grand Junction 1001. sh. 9.'1. pi 181 Great North of England l3'. pd 9 1 5,6d'1 Great Western ••• De) Hartlepool -, 8,000 .:e,oos Lee./s and Manchester 2000 3/. per cent. Leeds and 5e1by,....... lO Ol ' 5l ) / ° lo) . l l o. .t l h . S . h hs . h 11 . 6 (-1 5 0 5 11 11 : . F l p dp d d 4 190 124 01 1 100 sh. 41 1,500 11.55. Leicester And Swannington ....501. sh. all pd 75 1 5,103 10 per cent. Liverpool arid Manchester-10( Lsh. lON. pd 193 10 per cent. Ditto Quarter Shares Om pd 61 36,000 London and Brighten 501. sh. Pb Pd 7 12,000 London and Blackwell 501. sh. 31 pd ft 10,000 3 per cent. London an' Greenwich "01. sis. 20/. pd 4 25,000 London and Birmingham ...1001. sh. 901, pd 173 Ditto Quarter Shares 51. pd 3i London and Southampton -.50/. sh. 501. pd 451 Ditto ditto New 7,000 London Scrip and Croydon Trunk 20 1 /. 1. sh 7,0005 h. . 25( 12,000 London Grand Junction... 5O/. sh. 51. pd 2 0 10,0 31.mcbester and Bilmingham 70/.sh. 71 . pi Of 1 : p 1 9 7 i pd d Ditto North Midland 100/. sh. 25/. pd 411 Northern and Eastern lOO/. sh. AL pd 5 2,600 Preston and Wyre 50/. sh. 30!. pi •6 1 8, 1 '00 ... ...... South Eastern and Dover 71. pd 6 1. 1, 00 10/. per cent. Stockton and Darlington ION. sh. 240 9,000 ..., ..... Thames Haven 501. sh 21. 10s. pd 3 1,400 ...... Westminster and Greenwich 501. sh. 2!. pd 01 0 , 0 00 ........ York and North Midland ...50 . sh. 121. pd 12 8,000 Albion Copper NINES. 5/. sh. Nl. pi 12 1 4 0 : 0 " 00 .. 1i. ,,. 8 , .. Anglo All Mexican, is, 5/. pm...JON. sh. all pd 3,1 Allen n 151. eh. 121. lOs pd 121 Ditto Subscription .2.51. pa 4 2,000 lrl. P o l anos 1501, eh all pd 50 1 0,000 11. les Brazilian Im iss. 51. pm. .351. 211• 1 / 0 / 7 Pd 22 1 6,0 p. 0 3lacaubas & Cocaes United „.251. sh. 251. pd 7 11,000 Ditto St. John Dal Rey 201. sh. 91. pd bi 10,000 Bolivar Copper Company, 20/. sh. 20/. pd 5 10,0(10 „......... Ditto Scrip 10!. sh. 10/: pd 31 20,000 British Iron 6,000 .... ..... British Copper 5/. oh. 411. pd il Cate Branca Candonga 73/. pd 7 1 8 , 500 1! 8,500 ... EGCegnxileaiiColumbian,scrPahMn Company,,,,,, i ing . s A l. ss p o ci . a . t . i o . n i . 0 2 . 0 Polberou Consols lyn ........... ; ...... .................................................................. pdPdpPdixlPdPdpdd fi 111521.2140 i il 2,850 31. 20,000 Real del L M o o a n h te N , o tie,: . 2 UnDititetd:3:l:xican, 6,155 w D e. i t t t c L ork Scrip .. 3,000 11,500 30,000 ho l :n n . d d e cln l . U niwityhe5;;; ; ' .. z ... e. .. 6 .;. Pi ;; °: ; 541) 1 5. 00 411.0. 1 1 . 8, h a g7 h l:sgl .. ss° l o: l l:l l l... z Pd:cidi: d I 2 23 3851023° : LITERARY I I:giii: 1,000 1,500 15 s , A K u in st g r ' al t: if i .................... 1. tu .. r .. a . 1...: . .1 .. .............. ............................. : 9 70 0 MISCELLAR ... .... . 2( 1 0 6 0 : 0 7 0 ) 4 65 1 11 ... per C c E n, t t . Gcß.ariiiitniacspdrhpaaelscioneanromaiac,nia:Tyn.ab).l,.....:t...i. .................................. ................................... 2 33011 City Bonds, 4 per ce.se n t : 5. .............. 1 . 00 . 1.. h . 701. ...... 11 9 1 10,000 sh. ............ 1001. sh th ..l7/. l pd Pd 1:1 New Brunswick Land eom I l l ' Pd 9 5 8 5 2 ; 0000 : 101. percent. ll j 1 6 s. ThamescLondon. ou Hudson's c h 01, Cui: : : i a cn y . : SaleS.t C0mpany,,,,,,.,,, a n. . k R. y. . 0: 0... . ....,... a. . ... .... ........ ..... ,ii. ..... 50.; ~. isk. . h . 7 . .. . 75 . .... ..... 19 Company ..... 41. pd 10 °c ••• 1901 . 5 1;. 100/. pd 133 2 2 :6 14 5 5 1 r .. per p . 6. c c e e : t i .. Van ß e; Dinner. .......... 4,000 10,000 LIST OF SCOTTISH OM PANIES' PRICES, RBANKS,IB3B. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 183 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 2i. The SPRAYER took the Chair at the usual hour. Colonel SHALE, the new Member for Kinsale, and Sir TUOMAS lime- BURNS, the new Member for East Lothian, took the amths and their seats. NEW WRITS. Colonel RUSHBROOK moved that a new writ be issued for the elec tion of a Member for Stamford, in the room of Colonel Chiplin, who has accepted the stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds. And on the motion of the same Gallant Member, a new writ was also ordered to issue for the Western Division •f the county of Suffolk, in the room of Mr. Logan deceased. SUDBURY ELECTION. Sir T. FREMANTLE presented a petition from certain electors of the Borough, praying for leave to defend the return of Sir John Walsh. HULL ELECTION COMMITTEE. Sir G. STRICKLAND, as Chairman of the above Committee, re ported that they had met on the 16th inst., pursuant to the adjournment of th• previous Saturday, but they were unable to proceed inconsequence of the absence of Mr. F. Dundas, who sent them word that he had left town in consequence of the alarming illness of his mother. The Committee accordingly adjourned till to-morrew, in order to report the fact to the Committee. Mr. F. DUNDAS was then sworn at the table to the facts, and stated that the alarming symptoms had now abated, and he would be enabled to attend to the duty imposed upon him by the House. The Hon. Member was then excused for his non-attendance, and the Committee will pro.. ceed to business to-morrow. BRANDLING JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL. The above Bill was read a third time and passed. Sir G. STAUNTON presented petitions from Portsmouth and other places, praying for the total abolition of slavery. COPYRIGHT BILL. Mr. HASTIE presented a petition from the letter-Press printers of Paisley against the Copyright Bill. Mr. DENNISTOUN presented five petitions from Glasgow against the Copyright Bill. Mr. FITZROY KELLY presented a similar petition from the elm. positors of Ipswich. Mr. STRUTT presented a petition from Derby to the game effect. Lord DALMENY presented a petition against any further endow. went to the Church of Scotland. Mr. CHALMERS presented a petition from Dundee against the Copyright Bill. Mr. W. W. WYNN presented a petition from Denbigh against the negro appreticeship system. Mr. WAKLEY presented eleven petitions from diferent parties in London against the Copyright Bill. One of the petitions, which was from the members and Council of the British Medical Association, stated that they considered the Bill would be a great injury to science, and praying that the House would refer the matter to a S elect Com. mittee. Mr. rtmr. presented twelve petitions against the Copyright Bill. The Hon. Member cordially concurred in the prayer of the petitioners. The Him 311MBLII then presented a petition from Kilkenny against the Irish Salmon Fisheries Bill; also a petition from Edinburgh com plaining of the monopoly enjoyed by the King's printer there in the printing of Bibles, Prayer books, and other religious works ; and praying that the monopoly which expires next year might not be renewed by any Act of the Legislature. JOINT STOCK BANKS. Mr. HUME said that seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer had a notice in the book for to-morrow, for the purpose of renewing his motion relative to Joint Stock Banks, he (Mr. Hume) begged to give notice that it was his intention to move an amendment in the following words:—" And also to inquire into the system of banking generally, the fluctuation in the amount of currency, and the causes thereof, since 1833." His object was to have an inquiry into the proceedings of the Bank of England respecting the currency. Mr. GROTE presented a number of petitions from Printers and Pr;ssmen against the Copyright Bill ; one in favour of Mr. Hill's plan of Post-office Reform ; and one from James and William Leslie, of Toronto, in Upper Canada, complaining of divers grievancas existing in that province. Sir F. TRENCH moved that a copy of Sir F. Trench's letter to Lord Duncannon, in answer to that of Dr. Reid, respecting the ventila tion of the House, be laid on the table. LAW OF COPYRIGHT. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a number of petitions against the Law of Copyright Amendment Bill, from the booksellers and publishers of Edinburgh ; frem the letter-press printers of Edin burgh ; also one from the town of Cambridge. The Edinburgh petition ers stated that they viewed the progress of this Bill with very great alarm. They said that the existing law had answered extremely well, and that under it the printing presses of that city had increased upwards of sixty, and more than three thousand persons were engaged in connection with them. Both in the regard to the interests of literature and to authors, they thought the Bill could not advantageously be allowed to pass. The Attorney_ General observed, that after great consideration, he fully concurred in the sentiments of the petitioners on this subject. Sir W. FOLLEI'T presented a petition from the publishers of Dublin against the Copyright Bill, as it would have the effect of putting an end to the contracts into which they had entered with various au. there. The Hon. and Learned Member also pretented a similar peti tion from the Booksellers of London and Westminster. Mr. JERVIS also presented a similar petition from the Master Prin ters of London. GREAT YARMOUTH ELECTION. Mr. W. W. WYNN begged the attention of the House to a Petition o f very great importance, which lied been intrusted to him. The Petition was from Mr. Thomas Baker, the Agent for the Petition, against the return for Great Yarmouth, and he stated, that on the 17th day of the present month (April,) he went to the office of the Mayor of Great Yarmouth, who was the returning officer for the borough, in order to serve him with the Speaker's order for the produc tion of all the books connected with the late election. On inquiring at that office he was told that Mr. William Barth, the Mayor, had left Vermouth that morning at six o'clock, but would be back again next day. Accordingly he called at the office again next day, and the clerks then informed him that Mr. Barth had not returned, and that they believed ho had gone to London. The petitioner then went to his private house, where he saw Mrs. Barth, who said that she did not know where her husband had gone to, but that he would certainly be back in two or threa days, and in the meantime referred him to her son. That gentleman said ha supposed his father had gone to London ; that, if so, he would be found at his agents', whose names were given him. The petitioner made further inquiry, cud found that Mr. Barth had left for London at six o'clock in the morning. He then came to London; he arrived on the Thursday, and made repeated inquiries at the agents of Mr. Barth respecting him, but they said they had not seers him, nor did they know that he was in town. The petitioner had made repeated inquiries, but had not been able to gain any clue to the discovery. of Mr. Barth. The petitioner went on to state (and this was the most important part of his statement), that in cmsequenee of private information, he went to the shop of a Mr. Clarkson (we believe), and found that Mr. Barth had been there frequently for several days past, but that it was not known there where he resided. The petitioner submitted the matter to the consideration of the House, praying them to take it into their consideration, and give such directions as might seem best to their wisdom, and for that purpose he prayed that the ballot on this petition (which stands for to-morrow) might be postponed. The !tight Hon. Gentleman proceeded to say that he did not think the mere statement in the petition was of itself sufficient ground for postponing the ballot. In conclusion he should propose that the petitioner should be called to the bar, when he had no doubt a sull3lient case would be made out for postponing the ballot. The petition was then read at length by the clerk. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to Mr. Baker being called to the bar--even if all Mr. Baker had stated was true, the House ought not to interfere ; nobody would be disposed to say that Mr. Barth ought not to be punished if he disobeyed the warrant of that House—if he did so, let him be punished and be made an example of for what was a contempt of the House ; but the present was not the proper mode of proceeding. The ballot was fixed for to-morrow, and an attempt Was now making to postpone it to an indefinite day, till Mr. Barth came forward. Justice would not be in any way defeated by the ballot taking Pace, because the Committee was the proper tribunal to take cogni zance of Mr. Barth's offence, if he had committed any. There was no insinuation that the sitting Members had spirited him away, or been in any manner privy to the matter ; and it would seriously prejudice them to put them to an enormous expense, all their witnesses being in town, if they now postponed the Committee. There was every reason to believe, however, that when Mr. Barth was apprized of the Speaker's warrant leaving been issued, he would come forward and produce the books. As no inconvenience could arise from proceeding according to the esta blished rule, he should oppose the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and do all in his power to prevent such a precedent being set. Mr. WYNN wished to state to the House that he did notsee in what respect the sitting Members were prejudiced by the ballot being postponed, any more than they would be by adopting the course pointed out by the Honourable and Learned Attorney-General.—(Hear, hear, hear.) There was every reason to believe the party had o il. fully absconded. What he proposed was, that the ballot should stand over till Tuesday ; and in the meanwhile he would have art order made on Mr. Barth, which he would be bound to take notice of, as every person is bound to take notice of an order published in the Votes. The Attorney-General had asked for precedents. He ( Mr. W.) readily acknowledged that ho did not know of any instance in which a returning officer had been guilty of such misconduct. Ten days were surely enough of notice to give to a returning officer, ant it appeared that the agent had been incessant in his endeavours to find him out ever since. He hoped the House would agree to postpone the bal. lot until Tuesday, and in the meantime the individual would see what. the! House had done, and would no doubt come forward when he was aware that an order bad been made for his attendance.—(Loud cries of " Divide, divide.") _ _ ILI _Si ! - 0 190 114 304 48:1, 20 111 r. RUMBOLD could assure the House that he was i❑ no way a party to the proceeding. He knew nothing of the absence of Mr. Barth, and from the high character that gentleman bore, he zould not believe that he would for a moment step out of the way to avoid the service of the summons. Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no division took place. On our re-entering the gallery, we found Sir T. FREMANTLB supporting the proposition for calling the petitioner to the bar. The House divided, and there appeared For the motion 7B Against it 100 Majority against it - qw On our return to the gallery we found Lord MAHON en his legs, g i v ing notice for motion relative to Controverted Elections, the purport of which did not reach the gallery. COPYRIGHT BILL. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD rose and said--When I had the honour last year to more the second reading of a Bill essentially similar to the present, I found it unnecessary to trouble the House with a single remark ; for scarcely a trace then appeared of the opposition which has since gathered around it. I do not, however, regret that the measure was not carried through the Legislature by th e current o f f ee li ng which then prevailed in it s favour; but that opportunity has been afforded for the full discussion of the claims on which it is founded, and of the consequences to individuals and to the public that may be expected from its operation. Believ ing, as I do, that the interests of those who by intellectual pOitet, laboriously and virtuously exerted, contribute to the delight and instruction of mankind —of those engaged in the mechanical processes by which those labours are made effec tual—and of the people who at once enjoy and reward them, are essentially otte ; believing that it is impossible at the same time to enhance the reward of authors, and to Injure those who derive their means of subsistence from them ; and de siring only that this Dill should succeed if it it shall be found, on the fullest discussion, that it will serve the cause of intel lect in its noblest and most expanded sense, I rejoice that all classes who are interested in reality or in belief in the proposed changes have had the means of presenting their statements and their reasonings to the consideration of Par liament, and of urging them with all the zeal which an appre hension of pecuniary loss can inspire. I do not, indeed, dis guise that the main and direct object of the Bill is to ensure to authors of the highest and most enduring merit a larger share in the fruits of their own industry and genius than our law now accords to them ; and whatever fate may attend the endeavour, I feel with satisfaction that it is the first which has been made substantially for the benefit of authors, and sus tained by no interest except that which the appeal on their behalf to the gratitude of those whose minds they have en riched and whose J,ives they have gladdened, has enkindled. The statutes of Anne and of George 111., especially the last, were measures suggested and sustained by publishers ; and it must be consoling to the silent toilers after fame, who in this country have no ascertained rank, no civil distinction, in their hours of weariness and anxiety to feel that their claim to consideration has been cheerfully recognised by Parliament, and that their cause, however feebly presented, has been regarded with respect and with sympathy.—( Hear. ) In order that I may trespass as briefly as I can on the indul gence with which this subject has been treated, I will at tempt to narrow the controversy of to-night by stating at once what I regard to be the principle of this Bill, and call on Hon. Members now to affirm, and what I regard as matters of mere detail, which it is unnecessary at this moment to con. sides. That principle is, that the present ter 11 of copyright is much too short for the attainment of that justice which so ciety owes to authors, especially to those (few though they be) whose reputation is of slow growth and of enduring charac ter, whether that term shall be extended from its present length to 60 years, or to some intermediate period ; whether it shall commence at the death of the author, or at the date of first publication—in what manner it shall be reckoned in the cases of works given to the world in portions—are questions of detail, on which I do not think the House is to-night required to decide. So the prohibition of extracts made merely for the extractors' gain, which, however, is merely declaratory of the present law—of unauthorised abridgements, which is new.—and some provisions which were introduced merely from an anxiety to protect subsisting interests obviously fall into the same class. On the one hand, Ido not ask Honourable Members to vote for the second reading merely because they think there are some uncertainties in the law of copyright which it is desirable to remove, or some minor defects which they are prepared to remedy. On the other hand, I would en treat them not to reject this Bill on account of any objections to its mere details, but as they may think the legalized pro perty of authors sufficiently prolonged and secured, or re quiring substantial extension, to oppose or to support it. In maintaining the claim of authors to this extension I will not intrude on the time of the House with any discussion of the question of law, whether perpetual copyright had existed by our common law, or of the philosophical question whether the claim to this extent is founded in natural justice. On the first point it is sufficient for me to repeat what cannot be con tradicted—that the existence of the legal right was recognised by a large majority of the Judges, with Lord Mansfield at their head, after solemn and repeated arguments ; and that six to fire of the Judges only determined that the stringent words "and no longer," in the statute of Anne, took that right away. And even this Ido not call in aid so much by way of legal authority as evidence of the feeling of those men—mighty, though few—to whom our infant literature was confided by Providence, and of those who were in early time able to estimate the labour which we inherit. On the second point I will say nothing, unable, indeed, to under stand why that which springs wholly within, and contracts no other right by its usurpation, is to be regarded as baseless, because by the condition of its very enjoyment it not only enlarges the source of happiness to readers, but becomes the means of mechanical employment to printers, and of specu lation to publishers. I am content to adopt the interme diate course, and to argue that question, whether a fair me dium between the two extremes has been chosen. What is to be said in favour of the line now drawn, except that it exists, and bears an antiquity commencing in 1814? Is there any magic in the term of twenty-eight years. Is there any conceivable principle of justice which bounds the right, if the author survives that term by the limit of his natural life? As far as expediency shall prevail, as far as the welfare of those for whom it is the duty and the wish of the dying author to pro vide, may be regarded by Parliament, the period of his death is precisely that when they will most need the worldly com forts which the property in his work would confer. And, as far as analogy may govern, the very attribute which induces us to regard with pride the works of intellect is, that they survive the mortal course of those who framed them—that they are akin to what is deathless. Why should that quality render them worthless to those in whose affectionate remem brance their author still lives, while they attest a nobler im mortality ? Indeed, among the opponents of this measure it is ground of cavil that it is proper to take the death of the author as a starting point for the period it adds to its right. It is urged as absurd that even the extent of this distant period should be effected by the accident of death ; and yet those who thus argue are content to support the system which makes that accident the final boundary at which the living efficacy of authorship for the advantages of its professors ceases. I perfectly agree with the publishers in the evidence given in 1818, and the statements which have been repeated more recently—that the extension of time will be a benefit only in one case in five hundred of works now issuing from the press; and I agree with them that we are legislating for that five •hundredth case. Why not? It is the great prize which, out of the five hundred it risks, genius and goodness win. It is the benefit that can only be achieved by that which has stood the test of time ; of that which is essentially true and pure ; of that which has survived spleen, criticism, envy, and the changing fashions of the world. Granted that only one author in five hundred attain this, does it not invite many to attempt it, and impress on literature itself a visible mark of permanency and of dignity ? The writers who attain it will necessarily belong to two classes—one class consisting of authors who have laboured to create the taste which should appreciate and reward them, and only attain that reputation which brings with it a pecuniary recompense just as the term for which that reward is held out to them wanes. Is it unjust in this case, which is that of Wordsworth, now in the evening of life, and in the dawn of his fame, to allow the author to share in the rcm4.4sis.ation aus.liety tardily avv ;Ards hint? The other ems!. are those who, like Sir Walter Scott, have combined the art of ministering to immediate delight with that of outlasting succes sive races of imitators and rivals, who do receive a large actual amount of recompense, but whose accumulating compensation is stopped when it most should increase. Now, surely, as to them the question is not what remuneration is sufficient in the judgment of the Legislature to repay for certain bene factions to society, but whether, having won the splendid re ward, our laws shall permit the winner to enjoy it? We can not decide the abstract question between genius and money, because there exist no common properties by which they can be tested. If we can dispense an arbitrary reward—but the question how much the author ought to receive is easily answered—so much as his readers are delighted to pay him. When we say that he has obtained immense wealth by his writings, what do we assert but that he has multiplied the sources of enjoyment to countless readers, and lightened thousands of else sad, or weary, or dissolute hours f The two propositions are identical, the proof of the one at once esta blishing the other. Why, then, should we grudge it, any more than we would reckon against the soldier, not the pen sion or the grant, but the very prize money which attests the splendour of his victories, and in the amount of his gains prove the extent of ours. Complaints have been made by one in the foremost rank in the opposition to this Bill, the pioneer of the noble army of publishers, booksellers, printers, and bookbinders, who are arrayed against it— that in selecting the case of Sir Walter Scott as an in stance in which the extension of copyright would be just I had been singularly unfortunate, because that great writer received during the period of subsisting copyright an un precedented revenue from the immediate use of his works. But, Sir, the question is not one: of reward, it is one of justice. How would this gentleman approve of the applica • lion of a similar rule to his own honest gains? From small beginnings this very publisher has, in the fair and honourable course of trade, I doubt not, acquired a splendid fortune, amassed by the sale of works the property of the public—of works whose authors have gone to their repose, from the fevers, the disappointments, and the jealousies which await a life of literary toil. Who grudges it to him? Who doubts his title to retain it? And yet this gentleman's fortune is all, every farthing of it, so much taken from the public in the sense of the publisher's argument. It is all profit on books bought by that public, the accumulation of pence which, if he had sold his books without profit, would have remained in the pockets of the buyers. On what principle is Mr. Tegg to retain what is denied to Sir Walter Scott ? Is it the claim of superior merit ? Is it greater toil ? Is it larger public service ? His course, I doubt not, has been that of an honest, laborious tradesman ; but whet has been its anxieties compared to the stupendous labour, the sharp agonies, of him whose deadly al liance with those very traders whose members oppose me now, and whose noble resolution to combine the severest integrity with the loftiest genius brought him to a premature grave—a grave which by the operation of the law extends its chilli ness even to the results of those labours, and deprives them of the living efficacy to assist those whom he has left to mourn him ? Let any man contemplate that heroic struggle, of which the affecting record has just been completed, and turn from the sad spectacle of one who had once rejoiced in the rapid creation of a thousand characters glowing from his brain, and stamped with individuality for ever, straining the fibres of the mind till the exercise which was delight became torture—girding himself to the mighty task of achieving his deliverance from the load which pressed upon him, and with brave endeavour, but relaxing strength, returns to the toil till his faculties gave way, the pen fell from his hand on the unmarked paper, and the silent tears of half-conscious child hood fell upon it—and to some prosperous bookseller in his country-house, calculating the approach of the time (too swifty accelerated) when he should be able to publish, for his own gain, these works, sold to who ? And then tell me, if we are to apportion the reward to the effort, where is the justice of the bookseller's claim ? Had Sir Walter Scott been able to see in the distance an extension of his own right in his production, his estate and his heart had been set free, and the publishers and printers, who are our opponents now, would have been grateful to him for a continuation of labour and rewards which would have impelled and aug mented their own. These two classes comprise, of neces sity, all the instances in which the proposed change would operate at all ; the first, that of those whose copyright only becomes valuable just as it is about to expire ; the last, that of those works, at once popular and lasting, have probably in the season of their first success enriched the publisher far more than the author. It will not be denied that it is desirable to extend the benefit to both if it can be done without injury to the public, or to subsisting individual interests. The sug gested injury to the public is that the price of books would be greatly enhanced, and on this assumption the printers and bookbinders have been induced to sustain the publishers in re sisting a change which is represented as tending to paralise speculation ; to cause fewer books to be written, printed, bound, and bought ; to deprive the honest workmen of their subsistence, and the people of the opportunity of enjoying the productions of genius. Even if such consequences were to be dreaded, if justice required the sacrifice, it ought to be made. The community have no right to lee enriched at the expense of individuals, nor is the liberty of the press (ma gic words, which I have heard strangely blended in the din of this controversy) the liberty to smuggle . and to steal. Still,".if to thoselyespectable :petitioners—men:of intelligence and refinement beyond their sphere, which they have ac quired front their m ec h an i ca l assoc iation with litFrature_t could think the measure fraught with such misclAet, I should -- --___ , we re regard it with distrust and :alarm. But never, surely, ve the apprehensions of intelligent men so utterly baseless. ,112, the first place. I believe that the existence of the copyrie.l ul_ even of that five-hundredth case, would not enhance the p rie of the fortunate work ; for the author or the bookseller who enjoys the monopoly, as it is called, i 3 enabled to supply the article at a much cheaper rate when a single press is require d to print all the copies offered for sale, instead of the presses and establishments of competing publishers; and I believe . a comparison between the editions of standard works In ehich there is copyright with those in which there is none would confirm the truth of the inference. To cite as all instance to the contrary Clarendon's " History of the Re bel lion" is to confess that a fair test would disprove the objec tion; for what a n al o gy is there between the motives and the t acts of a great body, having no personal stimulus or inten t ! except to retain what is an ornament to their own power, and those of a number of individual proprietors; or betweenni a state of things in which the instance stands alone, !1 • °• , one in which all authors would be instigesed to publish and all readers, the class for whom the works would be _ e _ pub lished, or from whom they would be withheld ? But, after all, it is only in the five-hundredth case—the "" be prize in this huge lottery--that even this effect is to dreaded. Now, that effect is the possible enhancing the prics of the five hundredth or five thousandth book ; and this is airs" tually supposed "to be a heavy blow and great di s courage: ment to literature," enough to paralyse the energies of pu b lishers, and to make Paternoster-row a desert. Let it only be announced, say our opponents, that an author, whose works may Y outlast 28 years, shall bequeath to his children the r i g ht which he enjoyed that possibly some sixpence a volute may be f , added to its price in such an event, and all the machinery of printing and publication will come to a pause. Why, the same apprehension was entertained in 1813, when the pt ,. lishers sought to obtain the extension of copyright for theft _ own advantage to twenty-eight years. The printers til t e.! dreaded the effect of the prolonged monopoly ; they 11: r titioned against the Bill, and they succeeded in delaying it .e t a session. And surely they had then far greater plausibVe in their terms ; for in proportion as the period at which the contemplated exwnsion begins is distant its effect must ,be indistinct and feeble. Fewer books, of coarse, will survive 48 years than 14. The Act of 1814 operated on the greater number, if at all ; and ha s ex p er i ence j ust ifi e d t h e f ears which , the publishers then laughed t o scorn ? H as t h e num ber 0 ' books diminished since then ? Has the price of books beer; enhanced? Has the demand for the labour of printers Or; bookbinders slackened since then ? Have the profits of tb bookseller failed ? I need no Committee of Inquiry to answe these questions, and they are really decisive of the issue. - We all know that books have multiplied ; that the quarter in which the works of high pretension were first sustained have vanished; and while the prices paid for copyright have been far higher than in any former time, the proprietors 01 these copyrights have found it more profitable to publish in a, cheap than in a costly form, Will authors or the children O 1 authors be more obstinate—less able to appreciate and to meet the demands of the age—more apprehensive of too larg e a circulation—when both will be impelled by other motives than those of interest to seek the largest scale ; the first by th e impulse of blameless vanity or love of fame ; the last by th e affection and the pride with which they must regard the heir , , f thoughts of a parent taken from this world finding their wa through every variety of life, and cherished by unnum bere , minds which will bless his memory? If, Si r , I were call st to state in a sentence the most powerful argument against the pa rt h e_ objection raised to the extension of copyright on the the public I would answer, the opposition of the ers. If they have ground to complain of loss the public l a have none. The objection supposes that the works rf' 711 ,,,, be sold at something more than the price of the materials , tu ht , workmanship, and a fair profit on the outlay, if the copyrig ht be continued to the author, and of course, also supposea e t ' et works of which the copyright have expired are sold witn e ; profit beyond those charges—that, in fact, the author's super - added gain will be the measure of the public loss. W he e r a l then, does the publisher interfere ? Is the truth this---b", the usage of the publishing trade at this moment indefinitell prolongs the monopoly, by a mutual understanding of its rne_r e :; hers, and that besides the term of twenty-eight years whi' r the publisher has bought and paid for, he has something s nore 1 Is it a conventional copyright that is in danger ? Is the O a _ question whether the author shall hereafter have the full ter'' to dispose of, or shall sell a smaller term, and really assig n greater ? Now, either the publishers have no interest in the main question, or this is that interest. If this is that l e a terest, how will the public lose by paying• their extra size e n ii to the author who created the work, instead of the gentl eril lit publis n who prints his name at the foot of the title-page, and who w still take his 25 per cent. o n th e co pi es h e may sell ? This a! gument applies, and I appr e h en d conc l us i ve ly, to the m r at _ question—the justice and e x p e di enc y o f exten di n g the te 17.• I am aware that there is another ground of com plaint me t ' plausible, which does not a pply t o th e ma in ques tion, he t • I what is called the retrosp ec ti ve c l ause ; a com plaint that , i f cases where the extended t erm w ill revert to the fen' r ie ° d the author, that instead of excludng, by virue of an nri o compact, all the rest of the world, they, like t all the rest f the on this liberty in common with o th er s w h en they mad e de , world, will be excluded ; that th e y h a d a r i g ht to caicultahtieo,l bargain ; and that, therefore, it i s a v i o l a ti o n of faith t o prive them of their share of the common b e nefit. That thereis any violation of faith I utterly deny—they still have ,a 1 they have paid for ; and, when, indeed, they assert (wh ich they do when they argue that the measure will confer n o be nefit on authors) that they would not give an author any nsc -e for a copyright of 60 than of 28 years, they themselves refute , the charge of breach of faith by showing that they do not reckon such distant contingencies in the, price which they pay. If any inconvenience should arise I should rejoice to consider how it can be obviated; and with that view I introduced these clauses, which have been the subject of much censure, era powering the assignee to dispose of all copies on hand at the close of his term, and allowing the proprietors of stereo type plates still to use them. But supposing some incony c - i nience to attend this act of justice to authors; which I sbotdo greatly regret, still, are the publishers entirely witho... consolation ? In the first place they would, as the 131111 now stands, gain all the benefit of the extension of futuro,) o copysights hereafter s o ld abs o lut e ly to them by the aut hor ; and according to their own s t a t eme nt with o ut any advance .I_, price. If this ben e fit i s sma ll—i s con ti ngen t —is nothing its five hundred cases to one—so is the loss in those i, in which the right will resu l t to t h e aut h or . But it shohl further be recollected th a t every year , as co pyrights e%Pltrhe; they adds to the store from whi c h th e y may take freely. In infancy of literature a publisher-'s stock is scanty unless he aiter i pays for original co m p os i t i ons ; b ut, as one generation '_. another passes awa y, hi stor i es, nove l s, poems —all e l ',. bodying interest an d certa i n sa l e—fa ll i n, an d each:Jed neration of books e ll ers b ecome enr i c h e d b y t h e 01 3 °"' i t e time to whi c h h e h as contr ib ute d nothing. Can the be doubted that i n any case w h ere the prop er ties of t publisher and o f th e aut h or ' s representat i ves are imperf e , c e apart, either from additions to the original, or from the su ' thei r cession of sever a l wor k s f a lli in at different times , nie , common interest would unite them? One the argun'eie used—whether on behalf o f th e tra d e or t h e pu bli c I scares, +a, know—against the extension of the term is derived fre=t supposed analogy b e t ween t h e wor k s of a a aut h or anu e io discoveries of an i nven t or , w h ence i t i s inferred 'l ong the term which suffices for the protecti on o f th e one is lg. enough for the compensation of the other. It remains to , . proved that the protection granted to patentees is sufficient but supposing it to be so, although there are points of sire' b a ,. rity between the cases, there are grounds of essential and on, vious distinction. In cases of patent the merits of the il vc , be tiers are palpable, the demand is usually immediate, sad h is recompense of the inventor, in proportion to the utility n' i e work, speedy and certain. In cases of patent the subject bo generally one to which many minds are at once applied ; t g bqc t h eeu eri discovered aei first sirnes lo yvaoenpfrdrewedishfeti present t i le were 1 ü b t ese e rex i el n tf g ,nbosyot g oa i i n v nne e otr n thhi oes t invention is often no more than a step in a series of process e "; if Sliakspeare had not written Lear, or Richardson Claris sa ' other poets or novellistswould b • are invented them ? In P -8 r e ical science every t discovery is a step to somethin more per fect b ; and to give to the inventor of each a protracted Ire n nu° poly would be to shut out all improvements others. -11 t r r h y; e l e a a t re buteb , w t ohonoew, consequence some eSfViltlheasleffilL: who can • nnprove the masterpieces of genius ? They stand r , Per fect, apart from all things else, self-sustained, the models , I 4). imitation, the sources whence rules of art take their orig al e . And if we apply the analogy of mechanical invention AI literature, we shall find that in so far as it ext ends there is really in the latter no monopoly at all, im wever brief. For example, historical or critical research h es :: a close analogy to the process of mechanical discovery' yi wouldl i suggest pr o' t a h i' d at and how does the law of copyright apply to the truth stares it may reveal ? The fact discovered, the r i d; ascertained, becomes at once the property of nlaa k 'nes to accept, to state, to reason on and all that ren,--e, in the author is the style in which it is expressed. No ° el - ever dreamed that to assume a position which another bad -: covered, to reject what another bad proved to be fallacious, .e, stand on the table-land o f recogn i se d truth, and start frorn bas i anew, was an invasion of th e aut h or ' s right. Howearneslol been the thought, how severe the intellectual toil, by 1 " , ",8 the noblest sp ec ulations on t h e h uman m i nd and its dest iny h, a • st been conduct e d I They are the beatings of the soul eg aal the bars of it s c l a y t enement , w hi c h , if ruffled in the collisine: attest at once, by their str e n g th an d t h e i r fa i lure, t h at it is de of tined to move in a wider sph ere . A nd yet the pro ducts divine philosophy melt away into the intellectual atmosPhses which they enrich, and become the dreams arid the assurance of of others 1 io that the law of literary property of nec e be accommodates itself to the nature of its subject- 19 'h" t . ' work is properly a creation leaving it preserved in its entirety , 0 when it is mere discovery, rendering the essence of truth Y mankind, and preserving nothing to its author but the form 13 which it is enshrined. It has, Sir, been asserted that authorse themselves have little interest in this question, and that tliee's True it , are, in fact, indifferent or hostile to the measure. that the greatest living writers have not thought it befit tine , the dignity of their cause to appear as petitioners for it a f s ei personal boon ; but I believe there are few who do nnt . t ie the honour of literature embarked its the cause, and earn e ",, - e 't desire its success. Mr. Wordsworth, emerging for a no m- . from the seclusion he has courted, has publicly declared h i ! conviction of its justice. Mr. Lockhart has stated his sPi r s e i r hension that the complete emancipation of the estate 0 , e ; Walter Scott from its incumbrances depends on the issue; and, although I agree that we ought not to legislate for .. tst beir cases, I contend that we ought to legislate by the light n 1 t tions examples. The instances pass away, successive gener a it True do successive injustice, but the principle is eternal. is that in many instances if the boon be granted the it vain-- and frailties which often attend genius and render • true it is that in multitudes of cases it will not operate—but we shall have given to authors and to readers a great lessonll,s of justice ; we shall have shown that where virtue and ge' l _A, combine we are ready to protect their noble offspring, , 1 ! that we do not desire a miserable advantage at the cost of tne T errors ors